Talk:Battle of Ismailia/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Harrison49 (talk) 18:28, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   The article is well written and follows the correct style.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The article is well referenced.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The article covers the major events of the battle and is focused.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   The article follows a neutral point of view.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   The article does not appear to be affected by any edit warring.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Images are used well and freely licensed through public domain ruling.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   A very interesting read, and now a Good Article too. Harrison49 (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2011 (UTC)